From: | Markus Schaber <schabi(at)logix-tt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal |
Date: | 2006-05-10 15:04:25 |
Message-ID: | 446200F9.3070109@logix-tt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Hi, PFC,
PFC wrote:
> You need to do some processing to know how many rows the function
> would return.
> Often, this processing will be repeated in the function itself.
> Sometimes it's very simple (ie. the function will RETURN NEXT each
> element in an array, you know the array length...)
> Sometimes, for functions returning few rows, it might be faster to
> compute the entire result set in the cost estimator.
I know, but we only have to estmiate the number of rows to give a hint
to the query planner, so we can use lots of simplifications.
E. G. for generate_series we return ($2-$1)/$3, and for some functions
even constant estimates will be good enough.
> - please execute me and store my results in a temporary storage,
> count the rows returned, and plan the outer query accordingly
That's an interesting idea.
Markus
--
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS
Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nis Jorgensen | 2006-05-10 15:30:07 | Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-05-10 14:55:51 | Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2006-05-10 15:10:00 | Re: [PERFORM] Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
Previous Message | Nis Jorgensen | 2006-05-10 15:02:27 | Re: Question about explain-command... |